A new tool for subjective assessment of hearing aid performance: Analyses of Interpersonal Communication


  • Richard Paluch Hörzentrum Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany University of Oldenburg, Working Unit "Sociological Theory”, Oldenburg, Germany
  • Matthias Latzel Phonak AG, Stäfa, Switzerland
  • Markus Meis Hörzentrum Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany


The performance of two different adaptive beamformer approaches in environments close to reality were investigated. They were subjectively evaluated via questionnaires and focus group discussions. Additionally, a new tool was tested, to assess how well video analyses with external rating of subjects’ communication behavior, related to the grounded theory approach, generate new measures to describe the communication behavior using the different hearing aid algorithms. With this methodology, the results show different behavior of the participants between the algorithms in loud environments only. The new assessment tool was found to be a valuable method for obtaining a deeper insight into subjects’ behavior and a new promising outcome tool for audiology.


Appleton-Huber, J. and König, G. (2014). “Improvement in speech intelligibility and subjective benefit with binaural beamformer technology,” Hearing Review, 21, 40-42.

Bentler, R.A. (2005). “Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: A systematic review of the evidence,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 16, 473-484.

Cohen, J., Walden, T., and Brungart, D. (2014). “Effective communication in real-world environments with hearing aids,” Poster at International Hearing Aid Conference (IHCON), Lake Tahoe, CA, August 2014.

Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research (Chicago: Aldine).

Hasan, S.S., Lai, F., Chipara, O., and Wu, Y.H. (2013). “AudioSense: Enabling real-time evaluation of hearing aid technology in-situ,” Proc. IEEE Int. Symp Comput. Based Med. Syst., 167-172.

Latzel, M. (2013). “Compendium 4 – Adaptive Phonak Digital (APD),” Phonak Compendium (http://www.phonakpro.com/com/b2b/en/evidence.html).

Latzel, M. (2015). “Adaptive StereoZoom – Adaptive behavior improves speech intelligibility, sound quality and suppression of noise,” Phonak Field Study News.

Lindemann, G. and Matsuzaki, H. (2014): “Constructing the robot’s position in time and space – the spatio-temporal preconditions of artificial social agency,” Sci. Technol. Innov. Studies, 10, 85-106.

Picou, E.M., Aspell, E., and Ricketts, T.A. (2014) “Potential benefits and limitations of three types of directional processing in hearing aids,” Ear Hearing, 35, 339-352.

Ricketts, T. and Mueller, G. (1999). “Making sense of directional microphone hearing aids,” Am. J. Audiol., 8, 117-127.

Ricketts, T.A. and Henry, P. (2002). “Evaluation of an adaptive, directional-microphone hearing aid,” Int. J. Audiol., 41, 100-111.

Strauss, A.L. (1987). Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists (New York: Cambridge University Press).




How to Cite

Paluch, R., Latzel, M., & Meis, M. (2015). A new tool for subjective assessment of hearing aid performance: Analyses of Interpersonal Communication. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 5, 453–460. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2015-54



2015/7. Novel methods for behavioral & objective assessment of hearing function